Re: XProc Editors Draft 2007-07-19: Section 3.1 Comments

On 7/24/07, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote:
> / Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com> was heard to say:
> | And what about
> |
> | http://www.w3.org/ns/xproc
> | http://www.w3.org/ns/xproc-step
> | http://www.w3.org/ns/xproc-error
>
> Well, suppose we decide that XProc 2.0 is different enough from 1.0
> that we want to consider changing the namespace. If we've parked
> ourselves at /ns/ then we have to use /ns/xproc2 or something.

or just use version="2.0"
I won't fight for that but it's always a pity to use google to
remember the year of a spec...


>
> But, yes, /ns/ is the other obvious possibility.
>
>                                         Be seeing you,
>                                           norm
>
> --
> Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Many ideas grow better when
> http://nwalsh.com/            | transplanted to another mind than in
>                               | the one where they sprang up.--Oliver
>                               | Wendell Holmes
>
>


-- 
Innovimax SARL
Consulting, Training & XML Development
9, impasse des Orteaux
75020 Paris
Tel : +33 9 52 475787
Fax : +33 1 4356 1746
http://www.innovimax.fr
RCS Paris 488.018.631
SARL au capital de 10.000 

Received on Tuesday, 24 July 2007 17:00:39 UTC